Forum concerns

[esrice]

I don't believe you got an infraction for it, we simply removed it.

This is correct, I issued no infraction. Why? Because a big part of this job is using our discretion in cases where a hard-and-fast rule isn't broken. Because I am familiar with JetGirl's typical posting style, and because she didn't directly insult the member by calling him a name, I chose to remove and close, rather than infract.

 

[Que]

yep that one and the one by firecop where he compared us to the Oklahoma city bomber. it was closed, he was banned and it was reopened to bash him.

The one thread about the wife was addressed above. I'm not aware who closed/opened the other thread and why.

 

[sparky241]

The one thread about the wife was addressed above. I'm not aware who closed/opened the other thread and why.

it was closed because it compared all of us to the bomber after firecop through a tissy fit. he was banned then the thread was reopened.

i gotta run now but i will return later today

 

[jsharmon7]

I've been here since this place was relatively small, and I never remember it being this way. I think the membership size is mostly to blame. The more people you get, the wider the spectrum grows and the wider the opinions start to vary. Some people just don't quite have the people skills to interact civilly with others either. I think a large and diverse membership is great, obviously, but these headaches come along with it. For a place that has such an incredibly large FAQ section, I feel like there are places where the rules should be a little more cut-and-dry. I think this may alleviate some of the headaches and argument. So far, I think VUPD's post hits the nail on the head. It seems like any time LEO or .gov anything is posted, the same 5 to 10 characters ALWAYS jump in to make it something negative. Anyone who disagrees is a JBT or a holster sniffer or is accused of supporting the violation of civil rights. On the other side of the coin, some people personally insult certain posters anytime that person posts a new thread. The one in particular I'm referring to rarely posts anything I agree with, and I'm guilty of cracking jokes, but they shouldn't be ridiculed for posting things that the majority of folks here find "off-the-wall." VUPD was absolutely right when he said that the problem here most of the time is a lack of respect. The fact that this is the internet and people are free to say things online that they would never say to someone in "the real world" also fuels this fire.

In closing, my input on this would be to streamline the rules a little more to make it easier for the mods to do their jobs evenly. Also, we as members need to observe VUPD's rule #1.

 

[VUPDblue]

yep that one and the one by firecop where he compared us to the Oklahoma city bomber. it was closed, he was banned and it was reopened to bash him.

I just went back and read through that thread. After firecop was removed, the thread took a different turn and almost nobody "bashed" him. Also, it was never closed at all. Leaving it open wasn't a vindictive act since folks forgot about him after page one. If it came across different I apologize.

 

[Bigum1969]

I've been managing to miss most of the drama here on INGO.

Honestly, I've only really had a couple of issues in my entire time here. In the PW thread, we even have active participation from most of the mods. And to be honest, they are a great bunch of folks.

I had an issue after the first PW shoot and some of the interjection that was added to our AAR report by a mod, but everyone got it out of their system and moved on.

As in real life, who doesn't have disagreements? And, should mods really have to be the "respect" police? In real life, when people are disrespectful I deal with it and don't expect my mommy to come and help me.

There are other web sites that have been formed as a result of people being banned/warned, etc. here on INGO. One of them allows you to use profanity openly. I'm not sure about the other. But in the end, INGO is growing quickly and still seems to attract folks from the other forums to come on back from time to time.

I've gotten angry at the mods several times in the past couple of years. I've expressed it. And, you know what, I got over it.

Some people come on INGO to talk about guns and guns only. Others come on INGO to talk about almost anything but guns (that would be me... sometimes). And some people just come on INGO to complain about the government, forced vaccination and FEMA camps. We all have to coexist. Moderators can't force us to like what everyone has to say.

Anyhow, I like that we can have an open-ended conversation about what we can all do to make INGO an even better place. I hope that we focus on having a constructive dialogue and that we all recognize that being a moderator has to be one of the most thankless jobs on earth. You can't please everyone. And sometimes, you can't please anyone.

I don't think INGO is at any crisis. But, why not spend a little time working together to make it better?

Those are my rambling thoughts that essentially lack and cohesiveness.

 

[Tactical Dave]

Drama and internet forums go hand in hand...... can't have one without the other......

 

[VUPDblue]

I've been here since this place was relatively small, and I never remember it being this way. I think the membership size is mostly to blame. The more people you get, the wider the spectrum grows and the wider the opinions start to vary. Some people just don't quite have the people skills to interact civilly with others either. I think a large and diverse membership is great, obviously, but these headaches come along with it. For a place that has such an incredibly large FAQ section, I feel like there are places where the rules should be a little more cut-and-dry. I think this may alleviate some of the headaches and argument. So far, I think VUPD's post hits the nail on the head. It seems like any time LEO or .gov anything is posted, the same 5 to 10 characters ALWAYS jump in to make it something negative. Anyone who disagrees is a JBT or a holster sniffer or is accused of supporting the violation of civil rights. On the other side of the coin, some people personally insult certain posters anytime that person posts a new thread. The one in particular I'm referring to rarely posts anything I agree with, and I'm guilty of cracking jokes, but they shouldn't be ridiculed for posting things that the majority of folks here find "off-the-wall." VUPD was absolutely right when he said that the problem here most of the time is a lack of respect. The fact that this is the internet and people are free to say things online that they would never say to someone in "the real world" also fuels this fire.

In closing, my input on this would be to streamline the rules a little more to make it easier for the mods to do their jobs evenly. Also, we as members need to observe VUPD's rule #1.

Thanks for the support.

I want to take this opportunity to address the postings of a couple members in the General Politics forum on here. There are a couple folks (we all know who they are) who post lots *LOTS* of conspiracy theories and that's pretty much all they post. Some folks think that by the staff allowing these folks to continue to post their theories, we condone them. This is not the case. They aren't breaking any rules so what are we to do? I'm confident that the answer to that question is "nothing". I will say that this is another opportunity to suggest exercising respect. If you don't like what someone has to say, use the ignore list feature. More importantly, stop participating in that person's threads. If they continue to post and get conversations going, they'll continue to post here. If they continuously get ignored, they'll go away.

 

[VUPDblue]

I've been managing to miss most of the drama here on INGO.

I had an issue after the first PW shoot and some of the interjection that was added to our AAR report by a mod, but everyone got it out of their system and moved on.

I just want to take this opportunity to say that I'm the MOD in question above. What I posted in their AAR was a shining example of the disrespect I've been talking about in this thread. I am remorseful that I posted the way I did in that thread but I learned from it and you won't see me doing that sort of thing again.

 

[JetGirl]

And, should mods really have to be the "respect" police? In real life, when people are disrespectful I deal with it and don't expect my mommy to come and help me.

No, they shouldn't. But you are missing the point entirely.
That point being, if you call me a [insert derogatory name] and I respond to you the same way, we should either BOTH be infracted or BOTH be given a pass.
What's currently our topic here is the fact that if I call you [whatever name], I'll be infracted for personally attacking you by name calling, but your post will get overlooked and shrugged off. THAT is what the issue at hand is. Favoritism, bias, partiality, preferential treatment...whatever you want to call it.

 

[esrice]

I just want to take this opportunity to say that I'm the MOD in question above.

I had my hand in that one too. My final take-away was that we've got some really great people here, and we were all able to shake hands and be better people for it, even if we didn't see eye-to-eye.

 

[esrice]

That point being, if you call me a [insert derogatory name] and I respond to you the same way, we should either BOTH be infracted or BOTH be given a pass.

I can say that I've never personally seen it handled any differently than how you describe above. If two people go to name-calling, either they are both infracted, or the decision is made to dump the thread entirely rather than sort through and hand out infractions.

The one issue I see is that because infractions aren't public record, both sides think that the "other guy" got a pass, when in reality they didn't.

We try EXTREMELY hard to be fair and balanced. Heck, I've personally given infractions to Advertising Supporters and my own Father!

 

[VUPDblue]

That point being, if you call me a [insert derogatory name] and I respond to you the same way, we should either BOTH be infracted or BOTH be given a pass.
What's currently our topic here is the fact that if I call you [whatever name], I'll be infracted for personally attacking you by name calling, but your post will get overlooked and shrugged off. THAT is what the issue at hand is. Favoritism, bias, partiality, preferential treatment...whatever you want to call it.

We (MODs) don't talk about who got infractions. That said, how do you know that someone did or did not get an infraction? I can tell you with 100% certainty that if two members sling insults at each other and I see it, I give both of them infractions.

Next question:
Lets say you and another member both insult each other. You get an infraction. Why would you think the other member didn't get one? Would you then use the Report Post feature to bring the other insult to our attention? Why or why not?

 

[VUPDblue]

We try EXTREMELY hard to be fair and balanced. Heck, I've personally given infractions to Advertising Supporters and my own Father!

I'll one-up you there. I banned an advertising supporter for a week!

The point is that we strive to be fair and un-biased but we commonly hear how we're not. I would LOVE to find a way to clear that up.

 

[JetGirl]

The one issue I see is that because infractions aren't public record, both sides think that the "other guy" got a pass, when in reality they didn't.

And sometimes people brag that they didn't get an infraction.
For now, I have reasons to leave the rest of the particulars alone. So I won't comment further specifically.

 

[VUPDblue]

And sometimes people brag that they didn't get an infraction.

And that is another example of disrespect only it's a bit worse. Instead of just slinging the disrespect, they are now announcing to the world "I've been disrespectful and I got away with it!" The staff doesn't condone that behavior, but we do need it to be brought to our attention sometimes.

 

[Que]

No, they shouldn't. But you are missing the point entirely.
That point being, if you call me a [insert derogatory name] and I respond to you the same way, we should either BOTH be infracted or BOTH be given a pass.
What's currently our topic here is the fact that if I call you [whatever name], I'll be infracted for personally attacking you by name calling, but your post will get overlooked and shrugged off. THAT is what the issue at hand is. Favoritism, bias, partiality, preferential treatment...whatever you want to call it.

You are not entirely wrong on this point. Although I believe we all try to deal with both parties equally, I have seen members dog each other out (e.g., Cru and SJ; Big and IJ, HandK and OneBadV8, etc.); however, because I KNOW they are joking, I let it pass. While the same thing may occur with two members where I'm not sure of their relationship and will intercede with a PM or a warning infraction. I can see where this can be considered a double-standard, based on what is perceived to be favoritism.

 

[HighStrung]

And sometimes people brag that they didn't get an infraction.
For now, I have reasons to leave the rest of the particulars alone. So I won't comment further specifically.

And sometimes people lie to feel cool too. If I'd just been in a poo slinging contest with someone, I doubt I would believe them bragging about whether or not they received an infraction. Could have been they were just trying to ruffle your feathers again, since they had previously. I've got no dog in this fight, so I cannot really comment. I'm sure you know the particulars much more than I, just making an observation.

 

[esrice]

So I won't comment further specifically.

If you ever have a specific question, you can always PM me (or any Mod) and we can try and explain our decisions a bit more clearly. Obviously we can't comment on who got what infractions, but I'd rather you ask us then make broad assumptions about why we did what we did.

That goes for everyone too.

 

[christman]

ETA: JetGirl, are you asking that we PM the OP if a thread is deleted and explain to them why it was deleted?

I don't believe I have ever had a thread closed, but I have seen many that have been. However, if you as MODS don't currently inform OP's of the closing, I think this would be a wonderful idea via pm. It would give the OP a direct line to the person who handled the closure. At the very least, make it mandatory for the MOD who closes it to make a final post in the thread about the reason it was closed. ( I realize some MODS do that already, but not in all cases.)

It would go a long way in eliminating people's questions over fair practice in thread closures by getting all the "theories" of the reason it was closed out of the way.